Le Saboteur said:
I said upfront, but the lunacy is that you have absolutely no idea how modern film financing works. Receiving a percentage of the film's total box office is not a bonus, incentive, or perk. It's a standard contractual tool for studio's to defray their own production costs. It's calculated into every film's projected profitability by the sharp pencil boys, and a movie wont begin to be considered profitable until a certain plateau is reached. If it doesn't begin to pencil out, said film won't be greenlit. It's as simple as that. See Moedred's links to John Carter and The Lone Ranger. No further explanation is needed, because The Beards will receive what they will because of who they are, not because of what they may or may not do.
I'm not as certain of that as you are. The vast majority of movie contracts are actually stipulated to become effective
only under particular conditions. For example, with the clause that if a said movie was to gross
more than 600 millions, then the actors or the director could receive a percentage of the box office and so on. I think none of the Beards would ever even get 1/4 of what you predicted. 100 millions for each of them is just absolute nonsense. 100 million dollars is close to the
total budget of most of the biggest blockbuster productions that's been made in the past decade. Films like The Revenge Of The Sith or The Curse Of The Black Pearl had revolutionary special effects, a great cast with even some superstars actors, yet they cost only a little more than that. The Lord Of The Rings movies cost far less, and they were all more than three hours long with incredible photography.
Yes, it's true that the deal Robert Downey Junior signed to appear in The Avengers (and be blocked for
at least other two films after that) gave him a return of almost 50 million dollars. But it was the biggest contract deal ever. And a one of a kind exception as far as I know.
Le Saboteur said:
They're going to shoot in Hawaii and/or on a soundstage. Both propositions exponentially increase your production budget.
Decrease.
Considering the current state of art that's been achieved by digital imagery, shooting in a soundstage instead than on location could theoretically decrease the costs for production. A lot. With the CGI technology at their disposal, Disney could even make Indy go on Jupiter without the physical need to build
anything but a basic skeleton of the sets. I mean, come on, it's 2013. Studios can do things like Avatar. Or
this.
The latter film I linked had a total cost of less than 30 millions and has possibly the best CGI visuals ever to be seen in human history from now on. It's all been made on a PC, two times because it's 3D, and looks as freaking real as you can get. With less than 30 millions. Nah, I bet that an Indiana Jones movie, filmed in a soundstage, would cost 'em even less than 100 million dollars. Probably they
could do it with less than 80 if they really wanted to. And considering that Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull grossed almost a billion in spite of mixed reviews and bad word of mouth, I'd be ready to bet that a fifth movie could score so much better.
You all know it. People who liked Crystal Skull would go see the fifth chapter in a New York minute. And fans who didn't like it, myself included, would go to the theatre anyway, hoping to finally get the real Indiana Jones film they've been waiting for since decades.
Again. If given a good script (Terry Rossio and Ted Elliot anyone?? Andrew Stanton? Or Kasdan, who is also working for Disney as of now), a fifth Indiana Jones film with Steven Spielberg and Harrison ford could be one of the biggest box office hits in entire cinema history. And they damn know it.
Well now, also in the light of recent events, does this mean the movie will be made? Who knows? Maybe. Or maybe not. But after the
little rumour that circulated some months ago, I think it is safe to assume that we've never been closer than we are now. Trust me.
